Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘International’ Category

I’m pleased to add here the recent information from the IMI on the survey, which I last noted in my December entry, last year. This is the memo from IMI:

We are pleased to share with you the results of the IMI 2016 International Mediation & ADR Survey, which are now published on the IMI Portal:

https://imimediation.org/imi-2016-biennial-census-survey-results

In total, 815 participants completed this census survey, from mediation users, mediators, advisors, educators, students, providers and other stakeholders. The survey was designed to gather census data as well as views about Mediation & ADR Awareness. As statistical data in this area is still largely in its infancy, the results were particularly insightful and eye opening.

We very much appreciate the time and participation of all survey respondents. Their insight into conciliatory methods is of particular value to the Alternative Dispute Resolution community at a time when conflicts between businesses, governments and individuals are rapidly escalating on numerous fronts.

Certainly as IMI approaches its 10th anniversary, this information (and the many additional written comments submitted with this overview) will help us to prioritise efforts to raise the profile of mediation and ADR around the world. We hope the survey also inspires you to generate ideas in your own communities on how to continue to grow mediation and ADR as a viable alternative to drawn out legal proceedings.

Kind regards,

Ute A. Joas Quinn and the Survey Team
International Mediation Institute
www.IMImediation.org

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

The International Mediation Institute is conducting its biennial survey on mediation use and awareness. Your responses will assist in gathering a snapshot of mediation use:

Academia, business and governments universally declare mediation the most cost-effective and quickest manner to resolve conflicts. But do the majority of civil and commercial players even know the practical aspects of this game changer enough to use it with confidence? Have we done our best to let them know?

IT WILL ONLY TAKE 7 MINUTES OF YOUR TIME!
(see link at the bottom of the page)

The International Mediation Institute (IMI) invites YOU and YOUR COLLEAGUES to participate in a brief biennial survey to gather information about Mediation & ADR Awareness, IMI Performance, and YOU. IMI launches initiatives to promote worldwide growth of practical and sustainable conflict resolution systems. By completing the survey we can:

  • Find out what matters most to you about resolving conflicts,
  • Tell others what you are up against when it comes to conflict management,
  • Grow mediation by building awareness and support, and
  • Enhance the IMI organization to make it fit for YOUR needs.

Please forward the survey to people whose opinion you value!

If you participate in the survey by December 31, 2015 and leave your contact details at the end of the Survey, you will be included in a drawing for a free entrance into one of the unique IMI Global Pound Conference Seriesevents of your choosing in any of 36 cities in 26 countries (see http://globalpoundconference.org/) as our way of thanking you for making the time to give us your input.

Survey results will be sent to all who include their contact details in advance of being posted on the IMI Webportal.

We appreciate your time and participation.

About the International Mediation Institute (“IMI”)

IMI is a non-profit public interest initiative to grow mediation by driving transparency

and high competency standards into mediation practice across all fields, worldwide.
The basics of IMI in a Nutshell can be found here: 

TO PARTICIPATE IN THE IMI SURVEY

CLICK HERE

 
 

imi-logo.png

Read Full Post »

I’m pleased to announce this year’s Harry Elias-Singapore Mediation Centre-Singapore Management University annual lecture in mediation.

The speaker will be Dr. Hans Peter Frick; and his topic will be “Embracing a Mediation Culture: How your Company Benefits”.

Further information on the lecture and registration can be found here: http://law.smu.edu.sg/SML2015

Read Full Post »

This note is less about mediation in Asia, than about the potential Asian role in mediation beyond those geographical boundaries.

It is an article of faith, and a regularly repeated principle of regional – ASEAN and East Asian – politics, that neighbour states do not become involved in the domestic affairs of others. Without going into the reasons for or defences of this policy, it’s interesting to note a recent apparent shift, at least on the part of China. One of the issues that is a subject of comment – at least in Western media – is that the policy of non-intervention in self-serving in that it permits ongoing commercial engagement with nations that have dubious human rights records; and permits aid policies that – unlike many Western aid projects – are linked to the improvement of human rights conditions in recipient countries. The non-intervention policy becomes, in such circumstances, a no-comment policy: aid cannot be tied to domestic policies, on which the donor nation chooses not to comment or pass judgment.

However, recent news items show that China is willing to act as mediator in the ongoing conflict between Sudan and South Sudan: http://thediplomat.com/2014/06/in-south-sudan-conflict-china-tests-its-mediation-skills/

Cynically, the observation is made that this is less about diplomacy than about commercial interests and that the policy of non-intervention can be at least partially waived where (i) there are significant commercial interests of the prospective mediator nation; and/or (ii) that third party nation also has the necessary leverage with both parties to have some impact; and/or (iii) the mediating state has a strong “good neighbour” reputation.

Leave aside the scepticism about motives for a moment – what this does suggest is that we may see more of those ASEAN and Asian states, as regional and even as global mediators, where those states are seen as acceptable third parties; and they may well be acceptable precisely because they do not have the kind of history of political intervention that other “mediating” states have. Consider, as a parallel, the effectiveness of smaller states such as Norway in international politics.

In all cases, however, there will be reason to keep an eye on the reasons for this kind of ‘intervention’, not least as research on international mediation underscores the importance of the leverage of the mediator.

Read Full Post »